deadliestfictionfandomcom-20200214-history
User blog:Leolab/Policy Updates - 7/21/2017
So there’s a few policy changes I’d like to propose, in response to both conversations in chat and some confusion amongst users. Reasoning for changes are given in parentheses beforehand. New text for existing policy is highlighted in red. This will be open for a full week, so get your thoughts in. So, without further ado: =Article Policy Changes= (Discussion on chat about whether OCs get pages. Making unwritten policy written.) New Section: Original Characters Original Characters, also known as OCs or User Warriors, are not given pages on the wiki. Battles with an OC are not to be put on battle statuses. If the only match a warrior has involves an OC, they are not to be given a page. If a warrior has battles against warriors that are not OCs, then battles against OCs may be posted on their page under the “Disregarded Battles” section, with a note in the “Expert’s Opinion” section that the battle contained an OC. An original character is defined as a character or team who meets one or more of the following criteria: #A character who is created by a user #A character created by a non-user who is not in any published work #A non-canon version of a character #A team made of multiple people whose canons don’t intersect If a character or team meets one or more of the following criteria, they are not considered an original character: #A representation of a character whose existence and general feats are canon, but does not have a defined personality or powers (e.g, Commander Shepard from the Mass Effect series) #Names and personalities given to otherwise-generic characters for the purposes of a sim (e.g, Adventurers). #A non-canon version of a character who nevertheless is presented as an option in an interactive medium (e.g, Evil Cole McGrath) =Battle Policy Changes= (To reduce confusion about supports needed for fairness challenges and rematches. Note that any prior successful fairness challenges or rematches are valid even if they do not meet the new criteria.) Rematches Rematches must be done with the original author's approval. If the author disapproves, the user requesting the rematch can gain the publicly written support of at least three other users, at least one of which is an admin, who support the cause of the rematch, which will override the disapproval of the author. If the original author has had his disapproval overridden, but still feels that a rematch should not be done, he is allowed to gain the publicly written support of other users against the rematch. The side with the highest number of supporters wins, with ties going to the original author. In the case of inactive or retired authors, the three supporters rule still applies, and an admin approval is needed as well. If at any point, even after a rematch is done, sockpuppets are found to have been used as supporters, the side using them automatically has their position revoked. If the rematch was already done and found to have been invalid, then the original outcome will be posted in the battle status and the section will have a notification that the rematch was considered void due to sockpuppetting for votes. Unfair Battle Rebuttal The process for declaring a battle as unfair is as follows: #One person hereafter "the protester" brings up the idea of the battle being unfair and must provide a valid reason why said battle is unfair #The protester must then get three other users, at least one of which is an admin, who must clearly state support and agreement to the protesters' terms and want the battle to be deleted. #The protester cannot use old comments to support the deletion of the blog. If the claim goes without any support within one week then it is invalid. #If a user who thinks the battle is fair provides a reason why, and also gets the support of more users then the protester, at least one of which is an admin, to support them, then the fairness challenge is not successful. #The side with the highest number of supporters wins, with ties going to the original author. #Battles may not be closed while there is a fairness challenge Please note that "unfair" means that the battle swings far in favor of one warrior as represented in the battle itself, not the votes. It is not exclusive to one warrior overpowering another enough that there is zero chance of them winning. Battles that are "one-sided" are unfair. In battles which combine multiple warriors from different media into one team or in a free-for-all battle, called multi-man battles hereafter, the battle may be declared unfair via the Unfair Battle Rebuttal for any match-up between any two combatants in said multi-man battle being unfair. Even if there are other combatants that the weakest warrior might possibly be able to hold his own against, the inevitability of that warrior's loss against other members of the team make it as unfair as a normal fight. Category:Blog posts